Jump to content


Incoming! WoT now with Multicore support for rendering.

KRZY Upgrages Multi core Nerdy stuff interesting?

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

KRZYBooP #1 Posted Jan 30 2019 - 18:35

    Community Coordinator

  • Administrator
  • 3937 battles
  • 212
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    08-10-2015

Howdy Boom Jockies!

 

It's Happening!

 

Check out this cool info about how our game engine interacts with your CPU/GPU. The Article can be found HERE

 

 

 

 



GenPanzer #2 Posted Jan 30 2019 - 18:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 44819 battles
  • 3,729
  • [EFFIT] EFFIT
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

That's great, I guess. I currently don't have any issues playing your game, so I doubt I'll notice any differences.

 

Speaking of differences, but, I can't tell any differences in your side-by-side comparisons. I see the fps is different, but when I watch those clips, I couldn't tell any difference at all.

 

Perhaps someone can explain where the differences lie to the naked eye.



Garandster #3 Posted Jan 30 2019 - 18:44

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 6134 battles
  • 1,232
  • Member since:
    04-12-2018
So my question, will we ever see an increase in the render distance?

Cerbium #4 Posted Jan 30 2019 - 19:01

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19370 battles
  • 1,365
  • Member since:
    10-15-2012
very cool wg

JohnnyBlazin #5 Posted Jan 30 2019 - 19:01

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 14020 battles
  • 394
  • [HAZD] HAZD
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

I dont see the point. I can run max settings without it. This game isn't that advanced.

 



moogleslam #6 Posted Jan 30 2019 - 19:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 45930 battles
  • 4,932
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    12-20-2013

I think we need to see some benchmarks between an i7-8700k (6 cores & hyper-threading) and an i7-9700k (8 cores, but no hyper-threading) to know which will give the best performance. 

 

Then also, how much of an improvement is the i9-9900k which has both 8 cores and hyper-threading.



MagillaGuerilla #7 Posted Jan 30 2019 - 19:07

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 25890 battles
  • 4,643
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013
I run low graphics, maybe I can manage medium now.

Altwar #8 Posted Jan 30 2019 - 19:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 58412 battles
  • 5,296
  • [-GNR-] -GNR-
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View PostGenPanzer, on Jan 30 2019 - 09:42, said:

That's great, I guess. I currently don't have any issues playing your game, so I doubt I'll notice any differences.

 

Speaking of differences, but, I can't tell any differences in your side-by-side comparisons. I see the fps is different, but when I watch those clips, I couldn't tell any difference at all.

 

Perhaps someone can explain where the differences lie to the naked eye.

 

My thoughts exactly but with a kudos for continuing to work on improvements.

Belisarius71 #9 Posted Jan 31 2019 - 02:21

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 34695 battles
  • 28
  • [CLKEY] CLKEY
  • Member since:
    04-10-2013

View PostJohnnyBlazin, on Jan 30 2019 - 18:01, said:

I dont see the point. I can run max settings without it. This game isn't that advanced.

 

 

Agreed. This is another "so what" unasked for improvement.

IronPanterloons #10 Posted Jan 31 2019 - 03:19

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 3769 battles
  • 87
  • Member since:
    02-17-2015

I'd like to see a test demo app we can download like what we got when 1.0 was getting ready to roll out. Something where we can run a video and see what our specific hardware can do at different settings.

 

Running the 1.0 demo I actually got a couple people interested enough in WoT to sign up. Good propaganda.



Hard_As_Iron #11 Posted Jan 31 2019 - 08:29

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 17674 battles
  • 35
  • [KLICK] KLICK
  • Member since:
    12-27-2013

I am running an older Xeon X5690 3.5 Ghz CPU, with 6 cores and 12 threads and a GTX 1070 Ti GPU. On the Live Server, I have to turn AA off, V-Sync off, and turn down or off some of the details, to try and run the game at 4k resolution. On the Live Server, my FPS varies from 25 FPS (lots of close by action) to 80 FPS. The 25 FPS is really terrible, and it comes at a bad time, when the action is intense usually. I've resigned to running at 1440p on the Live Server, which looks fuzzy compared with the crystal clear 4k resolution.

 

On the 1.4 Common Test Server with the new multithreading support, I cranked all graphics settings to Maximum, with 4k resolution, AA Maximum, V-Sync enabled, and I think the lowest FPS I saw during intense action was about 56, which was not even a noticeable drop at all, during gameplay. My screen (like all others so far) is 60 Hz at 4k resolution anyways. This game looks amazing at 4k resolution (very noticeable compared to "fuzzy" 1440p), and the gameplay is so smooth with no "laggy" feeling and FPS drops, like on the current Live Server. 

This is a huge boost to the game performance overall. I can't wait for 1.4 to go live.


 



Hard_As_Iron #12 Posted Jan 31 2019 - 08:31

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 17674 battles
  • 35
  • [KLICK] KLICK
  • Member since:
    12-27-2013

View PostJohnnyBlazin, on Jan 30 2019 - 18:01, said:

I dont see the point. I can run max settings without it. This game isn't that advanced.

 

 

Try running at a higher resolution than 1080p. This game actually looks amazing at 4k, since the 1.0 patch.

MightyBarbarian #13 Posted Jan 31 2019 - 09:48

    Captain

  • Players
  • 38175 battles
  • 1,408
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011

View Postmoogleslam, on Jan 30 2019 - 13:05, said:

I think we need to see some benchmarks between an i7-8700k (6 cores & hyper-threading) and an i7-9700k (8 cores, but no hyper-threading) to know which will give the best performance. 

 

Then also, how much of an improvement is the i9-9900k which has both 8 cores and hyper-threading.

 

sarcasm?

moogleslam #14 Posted Jan 31 2019 - 14:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 45930 battles
  • 4,932
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    12-20-2013

View PostMightyBarbarian, on Jan 31 2019 - 04:48, said:

View Postmoogleslam, on Jan 30 2019 - 13:05, said:

I think we need to see some benchmarks between an i7-8700k (6 cores & hyper-threading) and an i7-9700k (8 cores, but no hyper-threading) to know which will give the best performance. 

 

Then also, how much of an improvement is the i9-9900k which has both 8 cores and hyper-threading.

 

sarcasm?

 

No.  Why would it be?  Yes, they're all overkill for this game, but it's still relevant.



MightyBarbarian #15 Posted Feb 01 2019 - 23:53

    Captain

  • Players
  • 38175 battles
  • 1,408
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011

View Postmoogleslam, on Jan 31 2019 - 08:55, said:

 

No.  Why would it be?  Yes, they're all overkill for this game, but it's still relevant.

 

imho, among their player base (russia, europe etc.) very few own the chips you mentioned, so i doubt they will do extensive testing with them or even bother, but who knows.

drammar09 #16 Posted Feb 10 2019 - 22:30

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 10357 battles
  • 9
  • [GRID] GRID
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013
I have noticed a much better improvement for sure. I have an AMD Ryzen ThreadRipper 1950x and Zotac 1080Ti AMP! Extreme edition setup and prior to 1.4 I used to have to use my 1950x in its game mode where it turns off 1 of the Die's on the chip. The 1950x with hyperthreading is a 32core system and 16 actual cores without hyperthreading. Now that 1.4 is out I no longer have to run game mode I can run my 1950x on its normal 16core mode instead of the 8core 16thread mode. I have noticed my FPS is constantly maxed at 100FPS which is what my current 2k UHD monitor maxes at 100Hz refresh. I like 1.4 for sure less stress on my GPU hoping to upgrade to a 2990wx in a bit and a 2080Ti. Its over kill but just how I've always done things.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users